Growth, Liner Consolidation and Impacts on Ports & Inland Connectivity Jolke Helbing
Global Container Market - Historical Global containerised trade has been increasingly steadily, since the slowdown: 182 million TEUs (full).estimated for 2015. 9.8% annual growth in the period 2003-2008. 6.6% annual growth in the period 2003-2015. Current container shipping generates 680 million TEU moves globally. This includes full, empty, local and transshipment moves (counting double). Some structural issues: Transshipment increasing Empty containers stable share Global trade slowing down General overcapacity of vessels 2
Global Container Market per Region Distribution is based on full TEUs in import and export per region (year to date August 2015). Demonstrates the dominant position of the Asia region (includes intra regional trade) handling 56 per cent of the global export volumes and 37 per cent imports. Asia handled some 52 million full export TEUs in 2015 (ytd August) Europe is more balanced as a region with 21 per cent on export volumes and 19 per cent of the total import volumes globally (respectively 17 million TEU on export and 19,4 million imports). North America imports are almost twice the volume of the exports. 3
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016f 2017f Capacity on the increase.. Accelerated growth pattern in vessel sizes An 8,000 TEU vessel did not appear before 2000 The first 12,000+ TEU vessel was deployed by 2008 The segment of large container vessels reached 10% of the fleet by 2013 This has already reached 15% in 2015 and is estimated to grow to 20% by 2017 The majority of newbuilding orders are for the Ultra Large Container Carriers This is driven by the race towards cost efficiency on the large key routes, Asia Europe and recently also more on the Pacific 25.000,0 20.000,0 15.000,0 10.000,0 5.000,0-100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Total Fleet Capacity by Category (TEU) Total Fleet Capacity by Category (TEU) 12.000 > 8.000-11.999 3.000-7.999 1.000-2.999 < 1.000 12.000 > 8.000-11.999 3.000-7.999 1.000-2.999 < 1.000 4
Vessel growth acceleration 2000 Post Panamax 5 / 8,000 TEU 17 rows 2007 Maersk E/class 14,000 TEU 22 rows 2015 MSC Oscar 19,924 TEU 23 rows 2017 Samsung 20,150 TEU - 23 rows Liners are ordering and deploying larger vessels to lower their cost per slot 5
Vessel Size - TEU The Cascading Effect is well underway Much larger vessels on Primary trade and also larger vessels deployed on Secondary deepsea trades where port capacity permits. This is driven by an excess of vessels displaced from primary deepsea trades cascading to the secondary trades. Actual demand at present seldom justifies these much larger vessels but it s a fact of life. With ongoing orders of ever larger vessels the cascading effect will continue. 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Average Ship Shizes on Key Container Trades, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 This will also push larger vessels into the feeder sector. Asia-ECNA via Suez Transatlantic (N.Europe) Europe-Southern Africa Europe-Australasia Asia-South America Pacific Asia-North Europe Europe-South America Atlantic Europe-Middle East/Indian SC Transpacific Asia-Middle East 6
Pushing Port Boundaries When vessel sizes increased initially, ports have accommodated as the increases were incremental. The next size of container vessels could result in significant capacity redundancies 7
Global Liner Consolidations Historically Liner consolidation has always taken place Cost reduction efforts and larger vessels, coupled with frequency of vessel departures has driven operational consolidation through VSA agreements mainly The developments around these drivers has resulted in 4 key Liner groupings by 2015 Maersk/MSC 2M CMA CGM/UASC/CSCL O3 Hapag Lloyd/NYK/OOCL/APL/MOL/ Hyundai G6 Cosco/K-Line/Yangming/Hanjin/ Evergreen CKHYE These 4 consortia controll almost 80% of the global vessel capacity 2M O3 G6 CKYHE Other CKYHE; 17,9% Other; 21,0% G6; 18,3% 2M; 27,2% O3; 15,6% 8
And the Landscape keeps changing... After the introduction of 2M four key alliances controlled almost 80% of the marketshares With the acquisition of APL by CMA CGM a new consolidation round is started in 1H 2016 With the apparent discussions of a new 2CEO 2 key Alliances control 55% of the market 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 2M O3 G6 CKHYE 2CEO Next? Other 23,4% 18,3% 15,7% A number of well established Liner companies are left in `broken` Alliances, including UASC, Hapag Lloyd, Hanjin, MOL, Yangming and the Japanses carriers 40% 30% 20% 15,6% 18,2% 28,4% Jointly with the other `independent` carriers this represents 45% of the market that will be forced to react. 10% 0% Current 2016 H1 Option H2 9
Driving investment requirements The increase in vessel sizes has resulted in port authorities and terminal operators incurring capital expenditure to upgrade their facilities 10
What does it mean for Intermodal Larger peaks and troughs Yard and gate connectivity required Inland infrastructure requirements Some ports trying to force inland distribution away from the surrounding roads Peak in rail requirements and abilities Who secures the investments to connect the hinterland Is this an opportunity for the Port Operator or an absolute requirement for survival for the Port Authority 11
Inland and supporting investments A port is only as good as its connections. Historically, PAs have supported road and rail link investment especially at the local and national levels. This is still essential but not sufficient. PAs are extending into supporting infrastructure. Barge terminals e.g. the Transferium in Rotterdam is a PA initiative Inland terminals sometimes in JV between the PA and the operator Scope may be provision of land or direct ownership/operation The importance of these trends is becoming increasingly apparent. 12
Extending the hinterland The PA has a crucial role in extending the port s reach for local hinterlands and international markets. Moving the hinterland closer to the port: Providing shippers with distribution facilities at the port means the cargo is in the supply-chain. The port should optimise the decoupling point in the chain to ensure no time delays, failure to deliver product, extra costs, etc. Develop closer relationships directly at origin/destination locations globally: Understand who is shipping the goods to/from origin/ destination and via which ports and shipping routes. Example - Southern California uses large-scale DCs, but Savannah has maximised this approach to grow traffic volumes and become an integral part of the logistic chain. 13
Inland Connectivity Solutions - Antwerp Initiatives to address Port Optimization Port Communication system (APCS) Barge Traffic System (BTS) Premium Barge Service Initiatives to address Inland Connectivity Mapping of all modalities Inland destinations Service providers Tools 14
Port Barge Solutions - Example Increase in terminal locations will complicate connectivity At the same time Port Strategic targets aim to increase rail and barge handling percentages that will require consolidation of container flows Dedicated barge facility is one option that has been proposed Other locations as barge focal center point outside the port has been considered as well Cost of 2 barge moves + transfer will have to weigh up against the direct delivery to specific terminals, waiting times and barge utilization factors 15
Port Barge Solutions - Example NextLogic System development Supported by Port Authority, Ministry of Transport and all terminal and barge stakeholders Optimization of information flows Concentration of container flows Optimization of port call / terminal call sequences Improvement of barge utilizations and efficiency Target implementation 2017 16
Globalization and Scale not matched. Consolidation on the Seas is not matched by consolidation in the Hinterland Duisburg on the other hand is an excellent example of volume concentration and focal point (volumes up to 3.6 million TEU in 2015) 2 principle solutions Port Terminal Operator creates its own inland terminals / gates to control & consolidate Rail / Barge Operators combine cargo flows to increase efficiency, especially at the sea port end of the logistic chain 17
But on a wider scale more options exist Connectivity is key Duisburg handled an estimated 3.6 million TEU in 2015, making it the largest inland port Greece as entry for the Balkans Privatization of Piraeus Soon to be privatized Thessaloniki Railnose privatization and ambitions Adriatic or North Italy ambitions TEN-T corridors connecting Europe will facilitate multiple entry points to the same market over time Consolidation of terminals and connectivity in ports Inland Gates with connectivity will drive the container flows 18
Concluding Consolidation of the Liner Industry will continue Larger peaks and troughs will have to be handled at the port facilities Similar concentration of cargo flows on the inland side is not following Yet, Port Authorities have ambitious goals on modal split to & from their ports Peak in rail requirements and abilities Barge connection system is challenged Investments and coordination on 2 levels in the Port and consolidation of inland corridor flows Who secures the investments to connect the hinterland? Million $ question - Is this an opportunity for the Port Operator or absolute requirement for survival for the Port Authority 19
Jolke Helbing Royal HaskoningDHV jolke.helbing@rhdhv.com +31883485228 20
Background Our team was established as Ocean Shipping Consultants in 1985 as an independent economic consultancy company, specialising in shipping economics and port development. Ever since, it has developed an unequalled database for trade, port and shipping data, together with considerable accumulated expertise on the part of the principals and consultants who comprise the team, combining extensive experience in market and strategy consultancy. Our team combines a wide range of knowledge and experience. Through our global office network we can offer local multidisciplinary and integrated services, based on global experience. Our tailor fit consultancy services contribute effectively to the successful planning, design, implementation, commissioning and operation of our client's investment projects. In April 2011, OSC was acquired by Royal HaskoningDHV. Royal HaskoningDHV, which is a leading consultancy and engineering services providers, ranking globally in the top 10 of independently owned, non-listed companies and top 40 overall. With nearly 7,000 professionals providing services worldwide from 100 offices in 35 countries, and an annual turnover of more than 700 million, Royal HaskoningDHV carries out more than 30,000 projects every year in planning, transport, infrastructure, water, maritime, aviation, industry, energy, mining and buildings. Royal HaskoningDHV. In combination with its international offices network, Royal HaskoningDHV delivers world-class solutions locally to Clients around the globe, for the public and private sector. Throughout its 130 year long history, Royal HaskoningDHV has always been a globally operating company with a local presence, resulting in a multitude of branch and project offices in Europe, South America, Africa, the Far East and the Arabian Gulf, all supported by our main offices in the Netherlands, the UK and South Africa. In this manner, we are able to offer multidisciplinary and integrated engineering and consultancy services locally, based on experience built globally. 21